[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090607103547.GR31286@elte.hu>
Date: Sun, 7 Jun 2009 12:35:47 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>
Cc: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
George Dunlap <george.dunlap@...citrix.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
"jeremy@...p.org" <jeremy@...p.org>,
Dan Magenheimer <dan.magenheimer@...cle.com>,
"xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
"x86@...nel.org" <x86@...nel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Keir Fraser <Keir.Fraser@...citrix.com>,
"gregkh@...e.de" <gregkh@...e.de>,
"kurt.hackel@...cle.com" <kurt.hackel@...cle.com>,
Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@...citrix.com>,
"xen-users@...ts.xensource.com" <xen-users@...ts.xensource.com>,
ksrinivasan <ksrinivasan@...ell.com>,
"EAnderson@...ell.com" <EAnderson@...ell.com>,
"wimcoekaerts@...mekes.net" <wimcoekaerts@...mekes.net>,
Stephen Spector <stephen.spector@...rix.com>,
"jens.axboe@...cle.com" <jens.axboe@...cle.com>,
"npiggin@...e.de" <npiggin@...e.de>
Subject: Re: Xen is a feature
* Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com> wrote:
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> There is in fact a way to get dom0 support with nearly no changes to
>>> Linux, but it involves massive changes to Xen itself and requires
>>> hardware support: run dom0 as a fully virtualized guest, and assign
>>> it all the resources dom0 can access. It's probably a massive effort
>>> though.
>>>
>>> I've considered it for kvm when faced with the "I want a thin
>>> hypervisor" question: compile the hypervisor kernel with PCI support
>>> but nothing else (no CONFIG_BLOCK or CONFIG_NET, no device drivers),
>>> load userspace from initramfs, and assign host devices to one or more
>>> privileged guests. You could probably run the host with a heavily
>>> stripped configuration, and enjoy the slimness while every interrupt
>>> invokes the scheduler, a context switch, and maybe an IPI for good
>>> measure.
>>>
>>
>> This would be an acceptable model i suspect, if someone wants a 'slim
>> hypervisor'.
>>
>> We can context switch way faster than we handle IRQs. Plus in a
>> slimmed-down config we could intentionally slim down aspects of the
>> scheduler as well, if it ever became a measurable performance issue.
>> The hypervisor would run a minimal user-space and most of the
>> context-switching overhead relates to having a full-fledged user-space
>> with rich requirements. So there's no real conceptual friction between
>> a 'lean and mean' hypervisor and a full-featured native kernel.
>>
>
> The context switch would be taken by the Xen scheduler, not the Linux
> scheduler. [...]
The 'slim hypervisor' model i was suggesting was a slimmed down
_Linux_ kernel.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists